🎦 The Martian full movie HD download (Ridley Scott) - Drama, Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi. 🎬
The Martian
Year:
2015
Country:
USA, UK
Genre:
Drama, Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi
IMDB rating:
8.1
Director:
Ridley Scott
Sean Bean as Mitch Henderson
Sebastian Stan as Chris Beck
Jessica Chastain as Melissa Lewis
Donald Glover as Rich Purnell
Naomi Scott as Ryoko
Lili Bordán as Blair
Mackenzie Davis as Mindy Park
Chen Shu as Zhu Tao
Nick Mohammed as Tim Grimes
Kate Mara as Beth Johanssen
Jeff Daniels as Teddy Sanders
Matt Damon as Mark Watney
Michael Peña as Rick Martinez
Aksel Hennie as Alex Vogel
Benedict Wong as Bruce Ng
Kristen Wiig as Annie Montrose
Chiwetel Ejiofor as Venkat Kapoor
Jonathan Aris as Brendan Hatch
Storyline: During a manned mission to Mars, Astronaut Mark Watney is presumed dead after a fierce storm and left behind by his crew. But Watney has survived and finds himself stranded and alone on the hostile planet. With only meager supplies, he must draw upon his ingenuity, wit and spirit to subsist and find a way to signal to Earth that he is alive. Millions of miles away, NASA and a team of international scientists work tirelessly to bring "the Martian" home, while his crewmates concurrently plot a daring, if not impossible, rescue mission. As these stories of incredible bravery unfold, the world comes together to root for Watney's safe return.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x800 px 9578 Mb h264 9455 Kbps mkv Download
HQ DVD-rip 720x304 px 1615 Mb mpeg4 1591 Kbps avi Download
Reviews
Predictable, immature dialogs, artificial heroism, non-innovative action.
I believe this is one of the overrated films on IMDb. While it has a high user rating and for some reason totally mistakenly in the Top 250, user reviews are mostly bad. And they are right. This movie is boring, unrealistic and totally not entertaining. I mean, what makes a movie a good movie? We all know that a movie is not real. We still feel entertained, why? Because we can feel the main characters struggle in a difficult situation, we suffer with him, we have empathy. None of these are happening to the audience when you watch this one.

It was actually the sappy behavior of the characters making you feel bored watching. I would have accepted the fact that he grew potatoes out of the feces of his buddies and they have left them there, okay why not ... he a botanist (how exciting by the way).

Just a few examples: For reasons unknown, he starts taking Vicodin with his potato - I actually had to look it up what Vicodin was, and then did not understand the message of this.

The captain of the ship blames himself immediately "I left him there" after they have received the message. Come on guys, give the character some time to emotionally apprehend the situation, before she starts blaming herself! Nobody does that immediately... not ever!

Who is this stupid moron looking like a drug addict in his totally messy office, where no one should have taken seriously? A total loner-loser, who works for NASA, doesn't even know the directors name when he is in his office... and then performs an act of a 3-year- old? What is this, are you kidding me? Why should the audience take this seriously at all?

Ridley Scott has totally failed to give the crew them some meaning. They could have just robots as far as I am concerned, wouldn't make this movie less worse.

There is just no excitement the whole time. He was deserted. You know exactly that his own crew will go back to help him at about in the middle of the movie. You know the attempt with the first rocket will fail, because you have already understood, some heroism with the "we won't let anybody behind"-message is actually the main story here. But you had to watch all that story of building that bogus rocket – I was bored to death! And then it explodes and fails, what a surprise!

So after that, you beg for a plot where something miraculous will happen. Instead, something totally ordinary happens, again! He flies to the crew. An astronaut goes out, he flies out of his capsule. I was asking myself... this is it?

For a moment I thought I was watching a Roland Emmerich, but I had sworn never to watch an Emmerich again. Ridley Scott now goes the same way. Predictable, immature dialogs, artificial heroism, non- innovative action.
2016-01-09
How to singlehandedly colonize a barren planet...
I had some reluctance about sitting down to watch "The Martian" because it is a movie starring Matt Damon. But finally got around to watching it almost a year after its release.

This movie, despite being a Ridley Scott movie, is as predictable as they come. You know what happens and what is around the corner a mile away. The movie was so predictable that even a blind man could foreseen what would happen next.

With that being said, don't get me wrong, because "The Martian" is still an enjoyable enough movie for what it turned out to be. However, it just wasn't a groundbreaking movie in any sense, nor was it a particularly outstanding movie, to be bluntly honest.

And a whole movie with almost nothing but Matt Damon was a serious test on my durability. I am not a fan of him at all, but a friend said that this is a really great movie, and that was the selling point for why I actually sat down and watched "The Martian".

The movie was fairly well paced, but running at over two hours and just watching Matt Damon struggling to survive on Mars for the majority of two hours was starting to become a drag.

While "The Martian" certainly is entertaining enough in itself and for what it was, then it is hardly a cinematic masterpiece, nor a movie that is likely to become a classic movie. In my opinion, there are far better movies that revolve around the Red Planet compared to "The Martian".

While Matt Damon had the majority of the screen time, then there was a handful of good casts to assist him as well. And I think that Jeff Daniels and Sean Bean were doing good jobs, just a shame that they didn't have bigger parts and more time on the screen.

My final score, once the red dust has has settled, comes down to a six out of ten stars. For me, then "The Martian" is the type of movie that you watch once, then you bag and tag it, most likely never to be watched again.
2016-07-01
Do you people even know what you're watching?
Really IMDb? An 8.2 rating, for this piece of crap?

Reviewer DavidC-29 put it best when he wrote; "This movie can be summed up with one word... vapid. As if Matt Damon's inherently vapid acting weren't bad enough, the makers of this film were so overtly focused on presenting an idyllic reality where no character behaves in any offensive way, to anybody, they produced an un-suspenseful, uninteresting, boring, vapid turd of a story. They fall over themselves to be so certain that no minority demographic is stereotyped that all characters have the sane vapid personality. And in what seems to be some sort of perverse effort to recompense reality, a very transparent hierarchy is followed to be certain that: the Black people are the most clever; the Hispanic people are next most clever; the Asian people are next most clever(carefully not portrayed as exceptionally smart), and of course the women are more clever than the men. Of course the only flawed demographic were older white male authority figures. To me this liberal, philosophical portrayal of what an ideal reality is reveals that they are the true bigots, the haters. They hate the differences that make people interesting. Ethnicity, femininity / masculinity, and their different traits should be loved and celebrated, not shamed, muted, or eliminated. It is the interaction of those differences that create an interesting story, not a vapid one."

When you go to a movie or turn on your TV, you think you're being entertained, but in reality you are being PROGRAMMED! Why do you think they call it "television programming"...

I would also like to point out one other angle of the propaganda in this movie... Like when the communist Chinese offer the assistance of their top-secret rocket in an effort to save one lone American. Also the way they made the crew be from multiple countries... I know NASA really does work with astronauts from other nations, but I also know that this is one reason why Hollywood loves these space movies, because it's a great vehicle for pushing globalist propaganda. Independence Day 2 is sure to take the globalist propaganda to the next level, as a planet united under the leadership of the UN (which is sick and laughable) must fight for their survival against aliens (which don't really exist)... The not so funny thing, is that the REAL greatest threat to humanity as we know it, ARE THOSE THAT PUSH THE GLOBALIST AGENDA! Check the "GEORGIA GUIDESTONES" for proof of that... Billionaires like Bill Gates and Ted Turner are working day and night, doing all they can to ensure that your family tree will stop bearing fruit as soon as possible. Ted Turner says lower global population by 85%, yet he has 5 children and 14 grandchildren... Why not sterilize your children and grandchildren TED? "Save the planet" TED! Or how about the big "climate conference" last month in Paris...?... Supposedly the planet is about to boil over (LIE) because people drive too much, or fly too much, or eat too much meat, so it was critical that all the world leaders meet in Paris to discuss a solution... Unfortunately the politicians, billionaires, and all their massive entourages were all forced to fly on lavish private jets, be driven to and from in massive convoys of armour-plated SUVs, and they were made to gorge themselves on 5-star cuisine... Why cant we come up with a way where we could have meetings like this, without having to "destroy our planet by burning these evil fossil fuels"? If only the technology existed which allowed numerous people in different locations to all have a conversation with each other at the same time... I mean I'm sure if such a technology did exist, "our leaders" would surely utilize such a technology, because NOBODY TAKES THE THREAT OF "CLIMATE CHANGE" MORE SERIOUS THAN THEM! Lol........

Wake up people... Every person on the planet could fit into a landmass the size of Texas, and we'd still all have enough room for everybody to have both a front and back yard... They are sterilizing us generationally as we speak... They have contaminated our food and water supply with GMO's... They know that all animals fed the GMO corn were sterile by the 3rd or 4th generation of animals who ate the corn... Many other rabbits/gerbils/rats/etc that were fed the GMO food developed large tumors and died from said tumors... You think Bill Gates and Ted Turner eat the GMO food? Hell no! That's for us, the peasants/slaves...
2015-12-23
Pretty well done
Contrary to what you might be thinking, the idea behind "The Martian" is not as original as you might believe. Way back in 1964, the movie "Robinson Crusoe on Mars" did the basic idea first. Of course, in the more than fifty years that have passed since that movie was made, special effects have improved greatly and we now know a lot more about Mars - which results in "The Martian" being pretty convincing in what it portrays (though I'm not sure if astronauts could hear sound in Mars' atmosphere.) The movie takes its time in showing the details of what one would have to face stranded on Mars, and while this does result in a very long movie (140 minutes in length), the movie is never boring or tedious, even with some predictable touches thrown in now and then.

The movie is certainly not perfect. Besides those predictable touches, there are some flaws with the writing of the title character. We only get to know him for a few minutes before he finds himself stranded on Mars, so it's hard to see how this new challenge changes this character. Also, he seems to take his predicament much better than you might think. The other flaw with the movie is with the climax. I won't reveal what happens, except it's somewhat hard to swallow everything that occurs. Don't get me wrong, the movie is still enjoyable despite these flaws. It's just not perfect - though when you think about it, very few movies are.
2016-01-30
Full of tension but I preferred Moon! 7/10
Review: Now that I have finally got to watch this movie, after listening to all of the hype and seeing loads of footage, I can actually say that it was quite enjoyable but I personally think that Moon was better. I've tried to watch Gravity again but I get bored after the first few minutes, and I've got a funny feeling that, that might happen if I try and watch this movie again. That doesn't mean that it's a bad film, because I did feel the tension throughout the movie but for some unknown reason, I can't see myself sitting down for 2 and a half hours, watching a film were I know what happens at the end. There isn't any outstanding performances, like Sam Rockwell in Moon, and the storyline is very straight laced, until his potato stash becomes contaminated. The film does look great, and so it should with such a big budget, and the crew was a great variation of characters which brought different elements to the team but I still feel that it lacked a certain something, which would have made this film an all time classic. Matt Damon (Mark Watney), played his part well and he made his character feel real, especially when he used his scientific knowledge to stay alive but I still felt a bit empty when the movie finished. Anyway, it's definitely worth a watch, for a tension/drama point of view but I personally was expecting more. Watchable! 

Round-Up: Is there anything that Matt Damon, 45, can't do! After his brief roles in Mystic Pizza and Field Of Dreams, during the 80's, he first came to light in Courage Under Fire in 1996 after starring in Glory Daze and School Ties alongside his close friend, Ben Affeck. He then played a lawyer with Danny Devito in the Rainmaker but his career really kicked off when he starred and wrote Good Will Hunting with Ben Affeck, and also won an Oscar for Best Writing. Since then, his career has gone from strength to strength and he has the ability to cover any and every genre with ease. The fact that he doesn't take himself to seriously and he treats people with respect, makes him a liked person in Hollywood, and with his return to the Bourne franchise and a movie about the Great Wall of China in the pipeline, proves that he's not one to be type-casted. Its amazing how a free book, from Andy Wear, which eventually went on Amazon for $0.99, became such a blockbusting success. Ridley Scott's amazing attention to detail, made him plant a real potato farm so the audience could see the different stages of growth. He also got detailed information from NASA which was also used in the film, so a lot of the scenes in the film, are not made up. Anyway, I think I would have appreciated the movie more, if I didn't see it so long after its release but with that aside, it's still a well made film which I found quite entertaining.

Budget: $108million Worldwide Gross: $630million

I recommend this movie to people who are into their adventure/drama/sci-fi movies starring Matt Damon, Jessica Chastain, Kristen Wiig, Jeff Daniels, Michael Pena, Sean Bean, Kate Mara, Sebastian Stan, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Aksel Hennie. 7/10
2016-03-13
More marshmallow than Martian!
The crew of an American base on Mars are forced to make an emergency departure leaving one crew-member behind presumed dead. But he is alive! Can the stranded astronaut find a way of communicating his plight to those on Earth and survive while he awaits rescue?

A fairly standard 'castaway' plot but one which offers many dramatic possibilities. Unfortunately few of these are realised in this pedestrian movie which fails to generate any significant dramatic tension. This is partly because the characterisation is thin but also because the challenges the stranded astronaut faces seem to be so easily overcome. Starvation? Grow potatoes. Punctured space-helmet? Sticky tape. Mars rover vehicle lacking power? Wire up a few solar cells. Communications equipment destroyed? Motor over to a handy Mars lander. We never sense that the 'Martian' (Matt Damon) is in a desperate, mind- and body-sapping struggle against the odds (conveniently he is a botanist).

Damon effectively portrays the 'Martian' as a likable guy but the problem is how to fill the two hours of the movie that remain after he is stranded? When a character is alone and unable to communicate it needs something exceptional to keep us glued to the screen. Maybe what's going on back home will do it. Not really because the cast of characters there are verging on cardboard cut-outs. The returning crew? Likewise. And the script is written on the assumption that the audience is a little dumb, e.g. A: It will be 500 Sols (Martian days) before we can rescue him. B: But his food will run out in 300 sols. C: So he'll die before we get there. Indeed! And so may we.

The movie has some good FX and the Martian landscape looks convincing. But there's nothing exceptional here to compensate for the lack of an effectively told story.

In essence this is an American feel-good fantasy film, celebrating ideals of technical omnipotence, racial harmony, gender equality and international collaboration (with those cool Chinese guys and gals). If only it were so. No wonder the credits rolled to the tune of The O' Jays singing 'Love Train'. School-kids will probably join in! But, to quote Sam Goldwyn, 'Include me out!'

(Viewed at the Odeon, Warrington, 06 October 2015)
2015-10-12
Quite a predictable and boring movie
First of all sorry for my English. I haven't read the book and my review is based solely on the movie. There are almost no spoilers in this review. Points of criticism: 1) they didn't manage to show the time scale of what's happening so that the viewer can feel it. They show numbers like 500 Sol, but you don't feel that this time has really passed. Interstellar shows the effect of long space travels on people souls and minds way better. 2) the results of some rocket launches were really predictable 3) I have a feeling that China is mentioned there only for commercial reasons. Like you have a market of 1.5 billion people and mentioning China would really attract Chinese viewers to movie theaters. 4) weather is too harsh there on Mars:) 5) (cliché) young genius scientist-sociopath who comes up with a solution of a problem 6) the main character basically overcomes a number of random events as in Gravity. Gravity, however, is more dynamic and makes you feel that there is a danger for the main character. In The Martian, basically, the main character does no mistakes, does not take the risk to achieve anything. His success is limited by some random malfunctions, otherwise he knows more or less everything.
2015-10-12
Were all the scientists on a day off when this script was written?
Wow this was a bad one, I thought Interstellar was painful but this was even worse (I know hard to believe!) My favourite part in the whole movie was when Matt points out that an explosion which occurred in a particular room during an experiment he was conducting was due to (you'll love this!) him exhaling too much oxygen into the room! Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure we exhale CO2 and inhale O2. I think even a fifth grader would be able to tell me that. I nearly cried with laughter when I heard him say that line and how he kept a straight face is beyond me, unless he thinks its true of course.

This was just the beginning of the lack of believable science in this movie and it was so painful to watch after more and more random unbelievable events started popping up. His one line killed the movie for me, from that point on I was looking for more "errors" and they just kept on coming.

Anyway to cover the opening sequence with how poor Matt ends up left on Mars to die, well there's a big storm that no one seems coming, they all rush to their landing vehicle to hot tail it back up to their orbiting mothership. Matt gets a whack in the gut with something (which we later find out pierced his suit completely but yet somehow the suit manages to stay pressurised with a hole in it) and decides to pass out. The rest of the crew fly back up to the mothership and, get this, immediately set course for home! They don't stay in orbit for say another 24 hours and recover Matt's body they just leg it back home asap. Odd I thought for a NASA mission to just abandon him and not say bring the body back for his family to bury.

When poor Matt wakes up he finds all the communications are down and all his friends gone. And by communications I mean the one satellite dish that was stuck to the habitat roof has blown down in the storm and been completely demolished, but not one of the solar panels outside is damaged, just a bit sandy. Seeing how comms back to Earth would be one of the critical systems would there not be 3 or 4 other methods of calling home, redundancies in case of a disaster? NASA didn't see the point in having any of those backups on this mission to Mars, what could possibly go wrong? Another good one is when he is told to drill and cut a whole in the roof of a perfectly airtight rover and sticky tape a big plastic balloon to the top of it. No reason is given for this yet it happens, I think it's so he can take some more plastic painting sheets with him but I cant be certain. Also wouldn't this drilling and cutting a big hole compromise the pressurisation integrity rendering the vehicle unsafe to drive around in without a space suite on, oh but not for Matt, he happily drives around Mars with no suit on at all with his new plastic sticky taped sunroof fitted trying to work out how far he can get on his batteries while whinging about how he'll never make it to the RV due to lack of power all the while singing along to the stereo with more flood lights turned on than at a football stadium. Um turn some crap off Matt that'll save you some juice.

Again another scene in the movie, an airlock somehow gets blown to bits and a big gaping whole is left in the side of the habitat Matt lives in. The solution, a big piece of plastic sheet and more sticky tape, he then repressurises the habitat and somehow his sticky taped plastic painting sheet is able to hold up fine, outside there are wild storms going on (which are visible through a few of the more believable looking pressurised windows) raging away and not one single piece of debris punches through his plastic painting drop sheet or does any damage to his rover or solar panels.

The mission to get him home is to send back the craft which ran away and left him in the beginning. NASA didn't tell the crew of the ship for months that he was still alive as they didn't want to hurt their feelings! So the plan to get him back is drive the mothership all the way back to Earth, do some gravity sling shot thing around Earth (sounds like Apollo 13?) rendezvous with a supplies pod (food and movies onboard probably) and fly all the way back to Mars and pick him up as he fires himself into space from a lander (after stripping out all the gear inside, removing the roof and covering it with another plastic painting sheet held on with sticky tape to save weight) already there for the next disastrous mission to Mars NASA has already cooked up.

For me this movie just went too far, way beyond what any normal person with a even a tiny grasp of science can cope with. I cannot believe Ridley, NASA and JPL were happy to have their names mentioned let alone their relevant ground breaking departments portrayed with such a lack of any real science.

I know it's a SciFi movie but you have to get the basics right and have some kind of explanation for the viewer to be able to buy into the ludicrous things which take place in the movie. Otherwise it just becomes a complete bore to watch and the viewer spends their time looking for more flaws.

My opinion, save yourself the money, stay home, get a pizza in & watch Blade Runner on BluRay again :-)
2015-10-10
An excellent example of the art of being a director
Ron Howard famously made audiences fear that the Apollo 13 astronauts would not be able to guide their damaged spacecraft back to earth, a pretty neat trick given the film told the story of a well-publicized event where the fate of Jim Lovell and company was well-known. Ridley Scott maybe on-ups him by translating the science fiction procedural "The Martian" into a film that makes you (in your less mindful moments) wonder how much the film reflects the real events (perhaps these are real but future events?). Also credit Scott for making a "Castaway"-like story of one man isolated and trapped into a compelling narrative. The challenge all the greater than Castaway given the amount of straight up math involved in the book (what's is a hexadecimal anyway and how does one help you communicate?). So no Academy Award nomination for Scott? Well it is up against "Room" where Lenny Abrahamson faced the challenge of recreating 2 people stuck in a room. Anyway, Matt Damon does get a best acting nom basically for being a likable guy who is good at math which required Damon to stretch - at least as far as the math part goes. He's favored to win largely as The Academy's way of saying: "Suck it Leo". The remainder of the cast is not terribly consequential, the writing is decent if a little math-heavy and the story satisfying. In short, get you STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) friends together and enjoy.
2016-02-05
NASA promotes the rape of science for tax-payer money.
I had low expectations of this film, and not to my surprise, my expectations where more then fulfilled.

After watching this terrible movie, I looked up the reviews on the Internet and was disappointed that so many reviews of sites and movie-critics where so positive. It felt like I was truly alone on this world. For me, the movie was sh*t, but everyone thinks it was great. Wat is wrong with me. But today, I started reading the reviews of some fellow IMDb- reviewers, and finally I see what is wrong. Only an intelligent person would perceive this movie as cr*p, but since most people are morons, that explains all the positive reviews.

I can only perceive this waste of pellicule as a promotion-movie for NASA. They probably want to gear up to get more tax-payer money for their upcoming research to get people to Mars. Believe me, this will be money wasted. People will never walk on Mars, seeing the current situation on this planet.

The movie was a travesty, where science and doing the math was used as a continuous red line to explain everything. I really didn't see any math or science in this movie. It was more like a lotto contestant who won every game, against all odds.

The astronaut was a botanist. WHAT??? That was the easy part. Planting some potato's in Mars-dust, and fertilize them with sh*t, in a dark environment does not give you a full 100% harvest of potato-plants. Believe me, I have done the math, in earth soil. He was also a doctor, an electronics engineer, a chemist, a programmer, a mechanic, a psychologist and what what more. An astronaut for me, should be a civil engineer, with a specialization in whatever field in science, but certainly NOT a botanist. Unbelievable.

And where did he get all of his oxygen? After getting his helmet ruptured and taping it off, he was down to 10% oxygen, but after a few seconds all was back to normal. Heh?

If you want more discrepancies, read some more reviews with low stars. This film is full of it.

Ridiculous Scott, stop making more movies, you seem to suffer of the self-delusion that you are a Sci-Fi director.

Nuff said.
2015-12-27
📹 The Martian full movie HD download 2015 - Sean Bean, Sebastian Stan, Jessica Chastain , Donald Glover, Naomi Scott, Lili Bordán, Mackenzie Davis, Chen Shu, Nick Mohammed, Kate Mara, Jeff Daniels, Matt Damon, Michael Peña, Aksel Hennie, Benedict Wong, Kristen Wiig, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Jonathan Aris, Shu Chen - USA, UK. 📀
×